August 2G, 1871.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
170 
Beberiae Sulph. Oij 
Acid Nit. Dil. 5ij 
Aquce ad |ij Solve. 
Sig. coch. rain, ter in die. — George Hahvie. 
[281.]—DISPENSING.—Will some of your corre¬ 
spondents inform mo of the best way to dispense the 
following prescription:— 
Kreasoti gutt. iij 
Zinci Oxydi gr. iij 
Mucil. Acaciae q.s. 
ut fiat pilula, ter die post cibos sumenda. 
Mitte xxiv 
in argento. 
It has been dispensed previously, but I have experi¬ 
enced great difficulty in turning out a nice pill.—W. P. 
Parry. 
[282.]—DISPENSING—I have just dispensed the 
following prescription, which presented a thick appear¬ 
ance, but no doubt the mixture is intended to be clear. 
Can any reader kindly inform me the best mode of 
manipulation ? 
lb Potass. Bromid. 5iv 
Spt. Ammon. Arom. 5j 
Spt. Chloroformi jiv 
Syr. Aurantii 5j 
M. Inf. Aurantii giiss. — Aquila. 
[283.]—BROMIDE OF QUININE, BROMIDE 
OF STRYCHNINE, AND BROMIDE OF MOR¬ 
PHINE.—“ A Glasgow Chemist ” will feel obliged for 
some particulars regarding the preparation, strength, 
dose, etc., of these articles. 
^ [284.]—SYRUP OF CHLORAL HYDRATE.—A 
few days ago, I had a prescription brought to me, of 
which the enclosed is a copy. 
Syrup. Hydrat. Chloral, gij. 
Half to one teaspoonful to be taken at bedtime in half a 
wineglass of cold water when required to procure sleep. 
—J. W. 
I was told that a child of ten years was going to take 
it. What strength ought it to have been made ? Is 
there a regular form by which medical men take their 
standard, the same as they do in B. P. preparations ? 
Had it been for an adult to take, of course the strength 
would have to have been stronger than for a child. If 
any reader can enlighten me on this subject, I shall be 
-obliged.—“ Exhibeatgr.” 
CARBOLIC ACID FOR SNAKE BITES.—We 
learn from the Journal de Med. de VOuest , and Bull. Gener. 
de The'r. that Dr. Weir Mitchell, from observations on 
the bite of the rattlesnake, and MM. Gicquain and Yiaud 
Grand-Marais, from observations on that of the viper, 
have arrived at the conclusion that the application of 
carbolic acid immediately on the receipt of the injury 
prevents both local and general poisoning. The pure 
•acid, however, if applied in too great quantity, is liable 
to produce sloughing, and even dangerous symptoms; 
hence it is best used in the proportion of two parts of 
acid and one of alcohol. Given internally, or applied to 
.the wound at a late period, it produces no effect. It is 
believed to act, not by neutralizing the poi son, but by 
.-causing contraction of the small vessels, and thus pre¬ 
venting its absorption.— Mature. 
The following journals have been received:—The ‘British 
Medical Journal/ Aug. 19 ; the ‘Medical Times and Gazette/ 
Aug. 19 ; the ‘ Lancet/ Aug. 19 ; the ‘ Medical Press and Cir¬ 
cular/ Aug. 18; ‘Nature/ Aug. 17; the ‘Chemical News/ 
Aug. 19 ; ‘ Gardeners’ Chronicle/ Aug. 19; the ‘ Journal of 
the Society of Arts/ Aug. 19; the ‘Grocer/ Aug. 19; ‘Pro¬ 
duce Markets Review/ Aug. 19; the ‘English Mechanic/ 
Aug. 18 ; the ‘Chemists and Druggists’ Advocate/ Aug. 20; 
“the ‘ Clerkenwell News/ Aug. 15; the ‘ Croydon Chronicle/ 
Aug. 9; the ‘Brighton Daily News/ Aug. 19. 
*** Mb notice can he taken of anonymous communica¬ 
tions. Whatever is intended for insertion must he authenti¬ 
cated by the name and address of the writer ; not necessarily 
for publication, but as a guarantee of good faith. 
The Pharmacy Bill. 
Sir,—In the Journal for August 5th you insert two para¬ 
graphs from “ the Report recently made by the Medical 
Officer to the Lords of Her Majesty’s Privy Council.” I 
regret that you have not published the whole of that Report, 
as its publication might probably have had the effect of stir¬ 
ring up every member of the trade to keep a very vigilant 
eye on the doings of that medical officer. However, the two 
paragraphs you have published contain quite sufficient to 
make every member of the trade keep a strict guard for the 
future, to prevent and to defeat any other amended Pharmacy 
Bill of so objectionable a character as the one which has been 
defeated in the present session of Parliament. 
I do not agree with Mr. Simon in his belief that it was 
“ an accidental oversight in legislation in the Pharmacy Act 
of 1868, that while all other powers were to be exercised for 
public purposes by the Council of the Pharmaceutical Society, 
the first section of that Act vested in the commonalty, and 
not in the Council, the very important power which that sec¬ 
tion confers.” I feel persuaded that the twelve thousand 
chemists of this country will never submit, without a much 
greater struggle than they have now passed through, to per¬ 
mit either the Privy Council with its medical officer, or the 
Council of the Pharmaceutical Society, to make such rules as 
they may think proper for the conducting of the business of 
a chemist and druggist, without first submitting them for 
the approbation of the members of the Society. Ilis Report 
is not a correct, but a very unfair, statement as to the selling 
of poisons, as the Act itself contains the most stringent regu¬ 
lations as to the sale of them. Any member of the Privy 
Council who is unacquainted with the Pharmacy Acts of 
1852 and 1868 would be led to believe there were no rules or 
regulations in existence as to the sale of poisons. 
The first section of the Pharmacy Act of 1868, which vests 
in the Pharmaceutical Society (with the consent of the Privy 
Council) to recommend regulations as to the keeping, dis¬ 
pensing and storing of poisons, is one entirely of a permissive 
character, to be used only if circumstances should arise to re¬ 
quire them. I assert that no case has been made out, that 
the public have never asked for, and that circumstances have 
not arisen to justify the Government in, such a needless piece 
of interference with the business of probably twelve thousand 
chemists and druggists in the kingdom. 
In proof of what 1 say, I point with proud satisfaction to 
the fact that the deaths from accidental poisoning, from errors 
in dispensing, do not amount to two per annum on the ave¬ 
rage of many years. I very much doubt whether any rules 
or regulations could be framed which would lessen that num¬ 
ber ; but those who know the business, and are capable of 
judging, feel that if left to the Privy Council, not one of 
whom knows anything about the business of a chemist and 
druggist, they might make such rules and regulations for 
“ the storing of poisons ” as would be very likely to largely 
increase the number of cases of accidental poisoning. 
I also assert that the public have never asked for the alte¬ 
ration of the Pharmacy Act of 1868. I have never seen in 
any newspaper either a letter or a leading article asking the 
Government to undertake such a needless piece of legislation. 
The business with which I am connected has been in exis¬ 
tence nearly a century, and during that long period, as far as 
I can ascertain, there has never been a single case of acci¬ 
dental poisoning, or anything approaching a serious mistake. 
No penalties which the Government could devise in cases 
of accidental poisoning could equal that which invariably fol¬ 
lows such cases, namely the utter ruin of a man’s business. 
It is to the interest of every member of the trade to make 
such rules and regulations for the prevention of accidents as 
the very varying circumstances of a chemist’s business re¬ 
quire. The regulations which are adapted to a town business 
are quite unsuitable for a business in an agricultural dis- 
trict. . . 
I hope every town in the kingdom will organize, and be 
prepared for the assault on the trade which will probably bo 
